Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 78 of 78

Thread: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    14,833
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Eskiman View Post
    One positive post after a win, maybe Angelus should cut us all and start the forum rebuild for next year.
    I have a "no trade" clause in my contract, unless he submits a list of fan site destinations that I can approve. Guess what sites are on it.
    Out of my mind; back in five minutes.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sherwood Park
    Posts
    4,258
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Prez View Post
    So it’s not a pick if the ball is caught behind the LOS?
    Correct. The relevant rule is quoted in post 50.

    It looked to me like O’Neil was able to jump out of the way of being hit.
    So I don’t think that was a penalty.
    Last edited by Esks1975; 09-10-2018 at 10:48 PM.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,211
    vCash
    815
    Rep Power
    84

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by cmbuk View Post
    Thatís how ur post read to me ... if Iím wrong I apologise .. I donít care about bc nor wally nor ed tbh..but, ( to me ) thatís how it came across though...
    No. It was in response to the comments on here about Edmonton working out a trade for Rainey, if heís available. Was taking a larger view rather than Eskimos-specific, and then remembered post-game comments that have been made & went on when I could/should have paused because, admittedly, as per my post, better placed in CFL thread, but donít know how to link.

    But to be clear, Wally made all the comments himself. This is my opinion about them & the BC situation. I care about all of the CFL & I find that one the weirdest & most interesting. Eskimos are boring compared to all the factors in play there.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    5,633
    vCash
    1005
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Esks4ever View Post
    Yep he is. Clearly he has issues with Edmonton and will be biased against them/ refusal to talk about them. They only thing he actually talked about in great length Edmonton related, was about Brian Kelly - and how he had to cover him one game...


    I don't think its a coincidence that we seem to always get suitor as our color commentator either...
    I thought I read somewhere that Suitor lives in BC so they try and keep him out west to do games. That could be why he does a lot of Esks games.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,211
    vCash
    815
    Rep Power
    84

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Eskiman View Post
    One positive post after a win, maybe Angelus should cut us all and start the forum rebuild for next year.
    I gave him rep, does that count haha

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtuck09 View Post
    I thought I read somewhere that Suitor lives in BC so they try and keep him out west to do games. That could be why he does a lot of Esks games.
    Which is why it was weird that he did the Johnny Manziel game with Rod Black & Duane Forde came west to work with CC that week. They didn’t even keep the usual pairs together.

    Again - wrong thread. Sorry guys!

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Spruce Grove
    Posts
    6,881
    vCash
    255
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    73

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    The sheer amount of time Bo Bo had back there to throw was unacceptable. Granted he threw some picks but he should have been pulling rubber crumb out of his a$$ for the next week. Our D needs an overhaul and first things first...get rid of Columbo... Next, teach some fundamental tackling. This hip check bullsh!t is exactly that...bullsh!t. There is no way the game should have been as close as it was, I mean coming down to the last few plays? If Calgary had won after the lead we had all game I'd have absolutely lost my mind.
    You have a problem because the last guy that punched me has a dent in his forehead the size of my pinky ring, and he dribbles when he smiles. - Dutch Dooley

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New Brunswick
    Posts
    12,412
    vCash
    512
    Rep Power
    300

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by boydo View Post
    The sheer amount of time Bo Bo had back there to throw was unacceptable. Granted he threw some picks but he should have been pulling rubber crumb out of his a$$ for the next week. Our D needs an overhaul and first things first...get rid of Columbo... Next, teach some fundamental tackling. This hip check bullsh!t is exactly that...bullsh!t. There is no way the game should have been as close as it was, I mean coming down to the last few plays? If Calgary had won after the lead we had all game I'd have absolutely lost my mind.
    Or you could be a Bears fan.
    no phone and internet for 36 hrs due to windstorm. life was hell.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    15,417
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    95

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Smartie123 View Post
    No. It was in response to the comments on here about Edmonton working out a trade for Rainey, if he’s available. Was taking a larger view rather than Eskimos-specific, and then remembered post-game comments that have been made & went on when I could/should have paused because, admittedly, as per my post, better placed in CFL thread, but don’t know how to link.

    But to be clear, Wally made all the comments himself. This is my opinion about them & the BC situation. I care about all of the CFL & I find that one the weirdest & most interesting. Eskimos are boring compared to all the factors in play there.
    Fair enough

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,322
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    47

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Prez View Post
    Other than the pick 80 threw before the pass to Hazelton, I didnít see too much wrong with the officiating. I don't remember if that tackle by 59 was in this or last game but that was a missed call as well. A Calgary guy also rolled into O'Neil's leg after a punt, but because he didn't go all Neymar, it was missed. Which worked out because Edmonton got the ball on Calgary's 29 right after. Remember, all turnovers and touchdowns are automatically video reviewed.

    The facemask on Reilly was legit, the guy did grab the facemask and turn his head. I don't think people are allowed to do that to running backs, let alone quarterbacks.

    CMC did briefly have possession of the ball in the scrum in a "down" position before it was punched out a split second later. Remember earlier in the game a pass was complete to a Calgary receiver and was punched out a split second later, and was ruled a fumble, so a split second of possession should count as "possession".

    Bresfhaskdfhjsafjdaskl did not survive contact with the ground, so that was correctly called incomplete. If he closed his legs, he would have won the game. The Eskimo DB who went for the interception should be yelled at.

    Calgary lost because they had too many turnovers, and their receivers did not catch the ball when they needed to.
    That asshat Suitor made a big deal of the fact Reilly was not a passer at the time of the face mask & was a runner, implying that perhaps the face mask shouldnít have been called. Heís become a complete moron, especially when doing Eskimo games, so much so that perhaps itís time to send him packing from the booth.....

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtuck09 View Post
    I thought I read somewhere that Suitor lives in BC so they try and keep him out west to do games. That could be why he does a lot of Esks games.
    He lives in Vancouver.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by boydo View Post
    The sheer amount of time Bo Bo had back there to throw was unacceptable. Granted he threw some picks but he should have been pulling rubber crumb out of his a$$ for the next week. Our D needs an overhaul and first things first...get rid of Columbo... Next, teach some fundamental tackling. This hip check bullsh!t is exactly that...bullsh!t. There is no way the game should have been as close as it was, I mean coming down to the last few plays? If Calgary had won after the lead we had all game I'd have absolutely lost my mind.
    Bovine is not a scrambling/running QB per se but is elusive in the pocket by just moving slightly around & avoiding the rush.
    That said, there were at least 5 occasions when he should have been sacked back there but for sloppy tackling by our D-Line.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    14,232
    vCash
    831
    Rep Power
    105

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Esks1975 View Post
    1. Bond hit the Stampeder who was right by the Eskimo receiver and saw Bond before the whistle went.

    2. That was a devastating hit by Mitchell on Smith for sure and it was blatant but it wasn't against the rules.
    From the CFL 2018 Rule Book

    "Article 8 ó Interference Before A Pass Is Thrown
    By Team A
    Prior to a forward pass being thrown behind the line of scrimmage, a Team A player may carry out an otherwise legal block on a Team B player at
    any point on the field, effective the instant the ball is snapped."

    Hazleton caught the ball at the 5 yard line. The line of scrimmage was the 4.

    3. That hold must have been on a previous play than the McCarty fumble play.

    4. There is no video evidence that shows Calgary had control of the football. If the official felt that McCarty or another Eskimo had control of it first they would have obviously been down by contact before it got wrestled away.

    5. Not sure if you are talking about holding on that play.

    The holds that PDO tweeted were actually tackles.
    Sorry missed this somehow.

    1. Definition of the passenger hit.
    2. Hmm....I'm going to have to look it up. I am pretty sure that rule was changed because of Nik Lewis. That was a classic Nik Lewis block...which people on this site used to get their panties in a bunch over. You very well may be right though on that one.
    3. Nope I think it was Beard with a blatant hold.
    4. Its common sense. Calgary recovered that ball and the video shows that. It is no different than the Saskatchewan game where there was no video evidence that the ball didn't cross the goalline but common sense tells you there was no way it did. It's no different here. That was an absolute game changing call and frankly done in a way I haven't seen before.
    5. I'll have to go back and see it again but I remember thinking we got away with one on that play at the time.

    I don't disagree with what PDO tweeted being hold. The fact he doesn't understand we got away with a lot of crap that game is what is mind-boggling to me.

    I also don't think the Daniels fumble was a fumble at all. He was hit as soon as the ball arrived by Grymes. I still stand by we got lucky on some of the calls. Which is fine...that's the CFL for you. Things even out eventually.
    Quote from Inquiring Mind:

    Of course stamphater is sacred... we all worship the ground he walks on

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sherwood Park
    Posts
    4,258
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Just to respond to your reply:

    1. There is no definition of a passenger hit in the CFL rule book. Or a tourist hit although I recall refs referring to that.

    Here is something from the CFL 2018 Rule Book as pasted on CFLdb
    "Rule 7
    ...Article 3 Unnecessary Roughness...
    t. Unnecessary physical contact, including but not limited to, running into, diving into, cut blocking or throwing the body on a player who is:
    out of the play, or should not have reasonably anticipated such contact by an opponent, before or after the ball is dead, or throwing a ball carrier to the ground after the ball is dead,..."

    The Stampeder was right at the point where the Eskimo ball carrier was being tackled and looked right at Bond. So he was not out of the play and could have reasonably expected to be hit because he saw him coming. I can see it not being called because of that. A person can often see the ball carrier getting tossed to the ground after being held up and that usually doesn't get called either.

    2. My source was CFLdb for the 2018 Rule and I check the CFL 2017 Rule Book which is accessed from CFL.ca. Mitchell didn't go after the guys knees or use his helmet.

    3. As soon as a Stampeder turned Kelly let go of one guy. Every one else looked squared to their guy to me. I guess we will Disagree.

    4. The video shows the ball ending up back under McCarty. The sideline angle shows him pulling it under his body and the reverse shows that as well. You can actually see Turner trying to pull the ball out from under McCarty in the replay. That means Turner did not have have the ball. If he has to take that long to get the ball then obviously McCarty had control of the ball and was down. He had a Stampeder on his back.
    It also shows the Stamper tackling and staying on McCarty after the Stampeder saw the ball was loose and that is a penalty.

    I am belabouring the point and yes there are plays that the Eskimos get away with things just like there are plays the opposition does.

    There was just nothing blatant in this game the Eskimos got away with when you compare it to those two tackles by pro wrestler Randy Richards.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Spruce Grove AB
    Posts
    6,548
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    200

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Esks1975 View Post
    4. The video shows the ball ending up back under McCarty. The sideline angle shows him pulling it under his body and the reverse shows that as well. You can actually see Turner trying to pull the ball out from under McCarty in the replay. That means Turner did not have have the ball. If he has to take that long to get the ball then obviously McCarty had control of the ball and was down. He had a Stampeder on his back.
    It also shows the Stamper tackling and staying on McCarty after the Stampeder saw the ball was loose and that is a penalty.
    See thats what i said, if you watch the replay you can see Turner pulling at the ball after it disappeared, this eliminates him from the who had the ball discussion, at least in my opinion.
    Edmonton Eskimos, 2015 grey cup CHAMPS!!!!!

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sherwood Park
    Posts
    4,258
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Bud Steen was just on the Jason Gregor show and describes what happened. Steen explained how having control of the ball in that sort of situation isn't the same as say making a completion. The official saw the ball under McCarty's arm with a Stampeder on him and the play is instantly dead with McCarty in possession.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    City of Champs
    Posts
    16,953
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by Esks1975 View Post
    Bud Steen was just on the Jason Gregor show and describes what happened. Steen explained how having control of the ball in that sort of situation isn't the same as say making a completion. The official saw the ball under McCarty's arm with a Stampeder on him and the play is instantly dead with McCarty in possession.
    He also saw the video I sent.

    His quotes were, in order....

    "Well that's a hold."

    "Bo Levi is moving out of the pocket so the officials are following him"

    "Well, it has to be one hell of a hold to get called at that time of the game."

    Both teams got away with a lot, it happens every game, it's the egregious **** (or nailing a guy for ticky tacky in a game where everything is happening) that is mind blowing.
    "This year, we did what we were supposed to do. We fought as a team. We fought as a team. And the fact is, we gotta go back and go to work, to make sure we finish this next time. That's all we gotta do. This right here makes us stronger. Let's understand who we are as a team. Let's understand this right here makes us stronger." - Ray Lewis, January, 2012.

    Superbowl Champs 2013.

    http://www.nonstopsportspicks.com/br...-professional/

  15. #75

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    After re-watching the game on the PVR last night I'm going to say that the defense wasn't nearly as bad as the post game stat lines looked. In fact they made a ton of plays including some well timed key stops and turnovers that lead to 31 of our 48 points.

    The fact is that up until Reilly fumbled in the fourth quarter, the D had surrendered four touchdowns, two of which were not really a result of poor defensive play (The Reilly pick that gave Calgary a short field, and the long rushing TD where Konar got tackled at the the point of attack.) So really we're only talking about two TD's that were legitimately surrendered in the first 3 quarters, and I'd take that all day against the high quality offense they've got in Calgary.

    If Reilly doesn't fumble, we probably score again and keep all the momentum. But instead we give Bo and the Stamps life with time on the clock and the luxury of playing three down football. So from that point on the D's main goal was to stop Calgary from scoring quickly which they did, it was just unfortunate that our O stalled out at that point and couldn't even drive to kill a bit of time.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    15,417
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    95

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by ben_the_eskimo View Post
    After re-watching the game on the PVR last night I'm going to say that the defense wasn't nearly as bad as the post game stat lines looked. In fact they made a ton of plays including some well timed key stops and turnovers that lead to 31 of our 48 points.

    The fact is that up until Reilly fumbled in the fourth quarter, the D had surrendered four touchdowns, two of which were not really a result of poor defensive play (The Reilly pick that gave Calgary a short field, and the long rushing TD where Konar got tackled at the the point of attack.) So really we're only talking about two TD's that were legitimately surrendered in the first 3 quarters, and I'd take that all day against the high quality offense they've got in Calgary.

    If Reilly doesn't fumble, we probably score again and keep all the momentum. But instead we give Bo and the Stamps life with time on the clock and the luxury of playing three down football. So from that point on the D's main goal was to stop Calgary from scoring quickly which they did, it was just unfortunate that our O stalled out at that point and couldn't even drive to kill a bit of time.
    Great post ! Agree 100 percent

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    14,833
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    The 3 down football at the end certainly didn't help the defense...but giving up 591 yards while being on the field only 25 minutes may have been the worst performance by any defense this year in the CFL. They gave up the yards, whether it was on a drive started by a turnover or not.

    I do want to give them credit for the week before though. They did a really good job holding Calgary in check on Labour Day.
    Out of my mind; back in five minutes.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sherwood Park
    Posts
    4,258
    vCash
    1000
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Labour Day Rematch After thoughts...

    Quote Originally Posted by ben_the_eskimo View Post
    After re-watching the game on the PVR last night I'm going to say that the defense wasn't nearly as bad as the post game stat lines looked. In fact they made a ton of plays including some well timed key stops and turnovers that lead to 31 of our 48 points.

    The fact is that up until Reilly fumbled in the fourth quarter, the D had surrendered four touchdowns, two of which were not really a result of poor defensive play (The Reilly pick that gave Calgary a short field, and the long rushing TD where Konar got tackled at the the point of attack.) So really we're only talking about two TD's that were legitimately surrendered in the first 3 quarters, and I'd take that all day against the high quality offense they've got in Calgary.

    If Reilly doesn't fumble, we probably score again and keep all the momentum. But instead we give Bo and the Stamps life with time on the clock and the luxury of playing three down football. So from that point on the D's main goal was to stop Calgary from scoring quickly which they did, it was just unfortunate that our O stalled out at that point and couldn't even drive to kill a bit of time.
    Great points.

    366 yards before three down football started and and 225 yards after it started. With 88 yards actually made on third downs.
    118 yards gained on plays where the Calgary offence was tackling people who didn't have the ball.

    Not many on here have any concerns about Calgary playing there down football though, as was witnessed when Jason Maas did have those concerns.
    Last edited by Esks1975; 09-13-2018 at 05:13 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •